Deriving Relations in Relativistic Mechanics: dE/dt = dm/dt?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter exmarine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanics Relativistic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving relations in relativistic mechanics, specifically examining the equation dE/dt = dm/dt in the context of energy and momentum. Participants explore various aspects of relativistic mechanics, including the definitions of mass, energy, and force, as well as the implications of these definitions on the equations of motion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that if E = m (with c=1), then dE/dt should equal dm/dt, relating this to the work done on a particle per unit time.
  • Another participant argues against the use of "relativistic mass," suggesting that mass should be considered as rest mass and introduces the concept of energy as E = γm.
  • A participant requests further elaboration on the previous points, indicating a desire for clarification.
  • Another participant attempts to derive equations, expressing confusion about the relationship between force and momentum, and how these expressions do not seem to match.
  • One participant corrects a claim about relativistic momentum, stating it is γmu rather than mu, and questions the derivative of the inverse square root presented earlier.
  • A later reply introduces the Hamiltonian approach, discussing how to define the Hamiltonian in terms of momentum and position, and deriving relationships between energy and momentum for a free particle.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of mass and energy in relativistic mechanics. There is no consensus on the validity of the initial equation dE/dt = dm/dt, and multiple competing views remain regarding the correct interpretation of relativistic concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their derivations and assumptions, particularly regarding the definitions of mass and the treatment of acceleration in relativistic contexts. Some mathematical steps remain unresolved, contributing to the ongoing debate.

exmarine
Messages
241
Reaction score
11
I am still trying to derive all the relations in relativistic mechanics, and have narrowed one of my problems down to the following. If E = m (c=1), then shouldn't dE/dt = dm/dt ? The left side of that equation is the work done on the particle per unit time, or the velocity vector -dot- force vector. I have been unable to get the right side of that equation to also equal that simple expression for power. I get (m*(u -dot- du/dt)) / (1-u^2) instead of the time derivative of the momentum vector (dp/dt), etc. Any ideas on how to show that? Thanks.

PS. m=m_o/sqrt(1-u^2), p=mu, vectors, etc.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Please do not use a "relativistic mass". No one in physics does this, you just find it in ancient textbooks and bad TV documentations. "Mass" is used as "rest mass".
##E = \gamma m##.

The acceleration (du/dt) is not the same as it is in classical mechanics, this could cause the difference.
 
That's very helpful. Thanks. Could you elaborate a little more?
 
Try to write the equations. (c=1)

If: E = m_{o}/\sqrt{1-u^{2}}
Then: \dot{E}=\dot{m}
And:\bar{u}\cdot\bar{F}=m\frac{\bar{u}\cdot\dot{\bar{u}}}{1-u^{2}}
So: \bar{F}=\frac{m}{1-u^{2}}\dot{\bar{u}}
But isn't the force supposed to be the derivative of the momentum?
i.e., \bar{F}=m\dot{\bar{u}}+\dot{m}\bar{u}

These two expressions don't seem to match.
 
Relativistic momentum is ##\gamma m u## and not m*u.
Your derivative of the inverse square root looks wrong.
 
One approach is the Hamiltonian approach. We define the Hamiltonian (which for simple systems of the sort we are going to talk about can be thought of as the total energy) in terms of momentum and position.

This is typically found in advanced college textbooks, but the math is really easy.
So for a free particle, we'd write:

<br /> H(p,q) = \sqrt{p^2 + m^2} <br />

where p is the (generalized) momentum and q is the position coordinate. v, velocity would be dq/dt.

Note that this is just the well-known relationship E^2 -p^2 = m^2.

If we wanted to consider a particle in a potential well, we'd add a potential term V(q) that was a function of position to the hamiltonian. But we don't really need it for what we're going to do.

Then we get the equation of motion from Hamilton's equations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamiltonian_mechanics

<br /> \frac{dp}{dt} = -\frac{\partial H}{\partial q} \quad<br /> v = \frac{dq}{dt} = \frac{\partial H}{\partial p}<br />

The first equation just says dp/dt = 0, that momentum is constant.
The second equation just says force * velocity = rate of work

force = dp/dt
rate of work = dH/dt

(dp/dt) v = dH/dt

multiply both sides by dt, then you get

dp v = dH

Substituting, we get:

v =\frac{p}{\sqrt{p^2+m^2}}

We can invert this to find the possibly more familiar p(v), and E(v), for a free particle
p =\frac{mv}{\sqrt{1-v^2}} \quad E = H = \frac{m}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}

So we get energy and momentum as a function of velocity. And we're done. If we want the motion of the particle in a conservative force field, we just add V(q) to the energy.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K